mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-21 20:28:24 +08:00
feat: review chaining + commit hash staleness tracking (v0.8.3) (#206)
* feat: review chaining + commit hash staleness tracking Each plan review skill now suggests the next review via AskUserQuestion: - CEO review → eng review (required gate) + design review (if UI scope) - Design review → eng review + CEO review (if product gaps) - Eng review → design review (if UI changes) + CEO review (soft suggestion) Reviews now track HEAD commit hash in JSONL entries for deterministic staleness detection. Dashboard compares stored hash against current HEAD and reports drift. Respects skip_eng_review config in chaining logic. Also adds commit tracking to design-review-lite entries. * chore: regenerate SKILL.md files for review chaining * chore: bump version and changelog (v0.8.3) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
@@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ After producing the Completion Summary above, persist the review result:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N,"commit":"COMMIT"}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
|
||||
@@ -433,6 +433,7 @@ Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
|
||||
- **overall_score**: final overall design score (0-10)
|
||||
- **unresolved**: number of unresolved design decisions
|
||||
- **decisions_made**: number of design decisions added to the plan
|
||||
- **COMMIT**: output of `git rev-parse --short HEAD`
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Readiness Dashboard
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -443,6 +444,8 @@ eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
cat ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_REVIEWS"
|
||||
echo "---CONFIG---"
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skip_eng_review 2>/dev/null || echo "false"
|
||||
echo "---HEAD---"
|
||||
git rev-parse --short HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, codex-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
|
||||
@@ -474,6 +477,27 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
- CEO, Design, and Codex reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
|
||||
- If \`skip_eng_review\` config is \`true\`, Eng Review shows "SKIPPED (global)" and verdict is CLEARED
|
||||
|
||||
**Staleness detection:** After displaying the dashboard, check if any existing reviews may be stale:
|
||||
- Parse the \`---HEAD---\` section from the bash output to get the current HEAD commit hash
|
||||
- For each review entry that has a \`commit\` field: compare it against the current HEAD. If different, count elapsed commits: \`git rev-list --count STORED_COMMIT..HEAD\`. Display: "Note: {skill} review from {date} may be stale — {N} commits since review"
|
||||
- For entries without a \`commit\` field (legacy entries): display "Note: {skill} review from {date} has no commit tracking — consider re-running for accurate staleness detection"
|
||||
- If all reviews match the current HEAD, do not display any staleness notes
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps — Review Chaining
|
||||
|
||||
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard, recommend the next review(s) based on what this design review discovered. Read the dashboard output to see which reviews have already been run and whether they are stale.
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommend /plan-eng-review if eng review is not skipped globally** — check the dashboard output for `skip_eng_review`. If it is `true`, eng review is opted out — do not recommend it. Otherwise, eng review is the required shipping gate. If this design review added significant interaction specifications, new user flows, or changed the information architecture, emphasize that eng review needs to validate the architectural implications. If an eng review already exists but the commit hash shows it predates this design review, note that it may be stale and should be re-run.
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider recommending /plan-ceo-review** — but only if this design review revealed fundamental product direction gaps. Specifically: if the overall design score started below 4/10, if the information architecture had major structural problems, or if the review surfaced questions about whether the right problem is being solved. AND no CEO review exists in the dashboard. This is a selective recommendation — most design reviews should NOT trigger a CEO review.
|
||||
|
||||
**If both are needed, recommend eng review first** (required gate).
|
||||
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion to present the next step. Include only applicable options:
|
||||
- **A)** Run /plan-eng-review next (required gate)
|
||||
- **B)** Run /plan-ceo-review (only if fundamental product gaps found)
|
||||
- **C)** Skip — I'll handle reviews manually
|
||||
|
||||
## Formatting Rules
|
||||
* NUMBER issues (1, 2, 3...) and LETTERS for options (A, B, C...).
|
||||
* Label with NUMBER + LETTER (e.g., "3A", "3B").
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ After producing the Completion Summary above, persist the review result:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N,"commit":"COMMIT"}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
|
||||
@@ -280,9 +280,25 @@ Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
|
||||
- **overall_score**: final overall design score (0-10)
|
||||
- **unresolved**: number of unresolved design decisions
|
||||
- **decisions_made**: number of design decisions added to the plan
|
||||
- **COMMIT**: output of `git rev-parse --short HEAD`
|
||||
|
||||
{{REVIEW_DASHBOARD}}
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps — Review Chaining
|
||||
|
||||
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard, recommend the next review(s) based on what this design review discovered. Read the dashboard output to see which reviews have already been run and whether they are stale.
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommend /plan-eng-review if eng review is not skipped globally** — check the dashboard output for `skip_eng_review`. If it is `true`, eng review is opted out — do not recommend it. Otherwise, eng review is the required shipping gate. If this design review added significant interaction specifications, new user flows, or changed the information architecture, emphasize that eng review needs to validate the architectural implications. If an eng review already exists but the commit hash shows it predates this design review, note that it may be stale and should be re-run.
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider recommending /plan-ceo-review** — but only if this design review revealed fundamental product direction gaps. Specifically: if the overall design score started below 4/10, if the information architecture had major structural problems, or if the review surfaced questions about whether the right problem is being solved. AND no CEO review exists in the dashboard. This is a selective recommendation — most design reviews should NOT trigger a CEO review.
|
||||
|
||||
**If both are needed, recommend eng review first** (required gate).
|
||||
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion to present the next step. Include only applicable options:
|
||||
- **A)** Run /plan-eng-review next (required gate)
|
||||
- **B)** Run /plan-ceo-review (only if fundamental product gaps found)
|
||||
- **C)** Skip — I'll handle reviews manually
|
||||
|
||||
## Formatting Rules
|
||||
* NUMBER issues (1, 2, 3...) and LETTERS for options (A, B, C...).
|
||||
* Label with NUMBER + LETTER (e.g., "3A", "3B").
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user